Ujwala--

I have struggled with Freire and other writers.  I am not discounting 
Freire.  I wrote that David R's translation of Freire into his 9 points 
is warm and humane.  Not all theory is hard to read.  These terms are 
opaque, not transparent.  I have to listen to the experiences of other 
people, and try to understand from how they are speaking what the words 
  mean.  Ditmar gave a gloss, this is very useful, as I said  I muddle 
along, I continue to muddle along with Freire.  I criticize the 
language because it is what it is--hard to read.  I have not, except in 
the African case, criticized his work--even though his wife, Elza did, 
when he got  too much like a professor when he was out in the field;  
he acknowledged this.  Why do you think I criticized those who use his 
ideas?  I  don't think I have. I think many of his words as translated 
are short-cuts, when the reality is  what should be described.  I have 
a tape of an interview  with Ira Schor which describes how he 
translated Freire's terms  into his teaching reality.  As far as I know 
Freire was the first to speak with  such passion about the  social 
position of illiterates and low literates.

I am sorry that you are offended, I don't think it is necessary.  My 
criticism of Freire's terms is not a criticism of the  man except in 
one example.  My CD of him is fabulous.

I know many find  Thoreau boring,  Gandhi was influenced by him.  I  
was with an Indian (from India) when he went on a "pilgrimage" to 
Walden..  My guess  is that his work is poorly taught in school, and 
indeed for most people, inappropriate.

With Jefferson there is the other problem--beautiful words from a man 
who continued to hold slaves while others set  them  free.

Thanks for writing.

Andrea

On Jan 8, 2007, at 4:14 PM, Ujwala Samant wrote:


> Andrea,

>

>> It's the language that is associated with Freire,

>> and that Ditmar used,

>> some of it is quotations, I am sincerely grateful

>> for that.  I am also

>> grateful for Ditmar embedding  definitions in his

>> text.<<

>

> All theory is dense, wordy and loaded with what I

> think of as linguistic equations. Even when Freire

> spoke, it was not easy to understand. And yet the mere

> expression The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, speaks to

> something in all of us. So to discount a great

> philosopher, thinker and his theory on the basis of

> your dislike of terminology and translations, that is

> too easy and too much of s short cut. To use an

> American expression, It's like throwing the baby out

> with the bath water.

>

>> But to your point, with or without quotations these

>> word get my goat

>> (obviously):  class consciousness, class struggle,

>> conscientisation,

>> critical praxis, codification (which I actually

>> usually do like), and

>> pedagogical praxis.<<

>

> I'm curious to know why they get your goat? And when

> you hear others speak passionately of their

> experiences, using these terms, will your dislike of

> these terms make you discount such rich accounts?

> Class consciousness and struggle is a reality of

> everyday life, for all of us working blokes. And to

> the people I serve, it is a nightmarish reality, not

> abstract terminology.

>

>> At one point Freire did go around   the bend, my

>> opinion, over  in

>> Africa, and started to dictate how his workbooks

>> were to be used. TSK.

>> Someone besides me picked this up, I was just

>> reading along and there

>> it was.<<

>

> Perhaps Freire felt the same as you did about the

> language and translations of his words? And if he felt

> his notebooks were not being interpreted as he meant,

> well? Having seen "popular education", "Freirean

> approaches to literacy" in a few countries, I've

> learned that there are as many interpretations of

> Freire as there are organisations! And each and every

> one of them believes, very sincerely that theirs is

> the truest approach. Not sure Freire would have

> agreed... While I agree that the translations are

> difficult, but then how many of us have taken the

> trouble to learn Portuguese (if we're that quick and

> ready to criticise the man in English) and see what he

> really meant? The debate over the quality of

> translations of Freire's work have been around for so

> long, that either we make a concerted effort to get

> better translations, learn Portuguese or .......

> muddle along.

>

>> By the way, I have I think  a CD of Freire talking

>> at Harvard's Ed

>> School.  That's ambiguous, I think it is a CD, I

>> know it is at HGSE.<<

> And what did he say on that CD?

>

>> David Rosen's list of attributes in Freirian/popular

>> education teaching

>> was  profoundly human and adapted  to a pluralistic

>> American zeitgeist,

>> my opinion.<<

>

> He took the essence of what at least I understand as

> being Freirean and put it in a wonderfully humane (as

> is David) way. It works in some way even to women in

> the Himalayas, HIV/AIDS affected mothers and daughters

> in Andhra Pradesh and streetchildren in Lahore.

>

>> I understand  Thoreau,  I live  near Walden Pond, I

>> know the New

>> England woods.  Of course we have somewhat the same

>> background, and

>> MAYBE those who come from S.America feel more of a

>> kinship with the

>> writing style of Freire.  Over to you, Andres.  (AND

>> WHERE IS THE

>> SNOW??  I need snow to fully appreciate Thoreau.)<<

>

> May well be indeed, but somehow I don't see anyone

> saying what an insufferable bore Thoreau was, how some

> had to suffer studying him..... and how inapplicable

> or pompous he was.....

>

> Cheers

> Ujwala

>

>

>

> __________________________________________________

> Do You Yahoo!?

> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

> http://mail.yahoo.com

> ----------------------------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Poverty, Race, Women and Literacy mailing list

> PovertyRaceWomen at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to 

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/povertyracewomen

>